“This is an opportunity … to eat the Americans’ Lunch.”
This statement is, I suspect, a variation on comments being made all over the world. Whether the subject is economics or diplomacy or scientific achievement or technological development or citizens’ health or their environment or political sanity, individuals, organizations and governments view the dysfunctional and backward-looking United States government as a golden opportunity to advance their agenda … at Americans’ expense.
Last weekend, I had the privilege of serving as the MC of the Columbia Basin Symposium held in Kimberley, British Columbia. The event was sponsored by the Columbia Basin Trust (a marvelous organization, but that’s a subject for another time). The symposium title was: Shift! Thriving in Change. They mean it.
Change is either an opportunity or a threat depending on how we confront it. Which takes us to Tom Rand and “Lunch”:
Lurching toward a future built on subsidized coal and petroleum is not smart. Nor is it plausibly defensible.
Historically, Americans have on occasion been remarkably generous.
This particular manifestation of generosity rewards only the fossil-fuel industry and our global competitors. It is bad policy and it’s stupid. Please let your friends and your (nominal) representatives in Congress know. You could also tweet the White House, but the current incumbent isn’t listening and probably would not understand if he were. This is not “fake news”. This is fact. Our Lunch is up for grabs.
***
[transcript]
Tom Rand—Managing Partner/ArcTern Ventures
Columbia Basin Symposium: SHIFT! Thriving in Change
Columbia Basin Trust
October 13-15, 2017
We have a federal government that’s put 1.4 billion dollars in the last budget -- over three years to be fair -- going out into the economy through our friends at BDC (Business Development Bank of Canada) and EDC (Export Development Canada). And that 1.4 billion is designed to ACCELERATE these kinds of companies in the market.
More working capital, more equity, lowering the risk on large, first of a kind commercial plants, like a woodland ethanol plant. BDC would pony up half that money. Which would make it easier for private sector to come in.
Now, this is not a government picking winners. This is very different. This is the government BACKING winners.
I make that point -- remember, you had the Olympics out here years ago, the Winter Olympics — you had an "Own the Podium" program. We had more "gold" medals than we’d ever had before. "Own the Podium" program said a very simple thing, "We're going to find athletes that have demonstrated ability to compete at an international level. And we're going to back those athletes and give them the space they need to train properly and that will be our success formula for the Olympics.” And, it worked!
I don't know if that's the reason we won so many gold medals, but that was the idea.
The point though, of that story, is they weren't picking winners. They weren't picking random people and saying, "I'm going to back that athlete". The athlete came back with a gold medal from the international track meet or whatever it was and said "I can compete."
Backing. That's what that 1.4 billion is doing. Companies that have demonstrated a potential to compete in global markets... have capital at their backs, have wind at their backs.
At the exact same time that THAT man (points to Trump) has decided to GUT any real effort on behalf of their Department of Energy to continue to support their clean tech sector.
To my mind, this is an opportunity -- I hate to put it this way -- to eat the Americans' lunch!
There is a competition for global market share in the single biggest global market in the 21st century and the Americans just blinked!
At the same time that we stepped up. PERFECT. PERFECT.
There's a REAL opportunity to take market share and get economic benefit for being at the table in good faith on the climate topic.
And that's how we're going to reduce emissions. I mentioned this earlier.
Exporting these technologies is how Canada will move the needle on global GHG (green house gases). We have to reduce our emissions at home, but the amount of emissions we can reduce GLOBALLY by exporting technologies to the 'States, to Pakistan, to India, to Chile... and enabling those countries to move their emission needle, because we've given them economically viable, high-margin options.
THAT's how WE move the needle globally is to export these technologies.
# # #